Commissioner of Customs Vs. Jyoti Structures Ltd.

Commissioner of Customs vs Jyoti Structures Ltd.

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Jan 29, 2007

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/44689

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/44689
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Judge: V T M.
Decided On: Jan 29, 2007
Subject: Service Tax

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Service Tax

Key legal issue: Service Tax

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Commissioner of Customs

Respondent

Jyoti Structures Ltd.

Excerpt

1. this is a departmental appeal against order of the commissioner (appeals) no. cex.xi/akd/151/nsk/apl/05 dated 14-10-2005 by which commissioner (appeals) has upheld the penalty of rs. 1000/- imposed under section 76 of the finance act, 1944 (sic) (1994).2. heard the learned dr. none appeared for the respondents. perused the records.3. the learned dr submits that in this case there is a delay of 160 days in payment of service tax and therefore the penalty under section 76 would be minimum of rs. 16,000/- to a maximum of rs. 32,000/-. the imposition of penalty of rs. 1000/- which was confirmed by the commissioner is simply in violation of mandatory minimum penalty of rs. 100/- per day under section 76, as held in the case of eta engineering ltd. v. cce, chennai reported in 2006 (3) s.t.r. 429 (tri-lb) : 2004 (174) e.l.t. 19 (t.-lb).4. i find the submissions of the learned dr convincing and therefore set aside the order of the original authority and commissioner (appeals) in so far as it relates to penalty imposed under section 76 of the finance act, 1944 (sic) (1994) with the direction that the original authority should decide the penalty afresh after giving an opportunity of hearing to the respondents.

Full Judgment

1. This is a Departmental appeal against order of the Commissioner (Appeals) No. CEX.XI/AKD/151/NSK/APL/05 dated 14-10-2005 by which Commissioner (Appeals) has upheld the penalty of Rs. 1000/- imposed under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1944 (sic) (1994).

2. Heard the learned DR. None appeared for the Respondents. Perused the records.

3. The learned DR submits that in this case there is a delay of 160 days in payment of Service tax and therefore the penalty under Section 76 would be minimum of Rs. 16,000/- to a maximum of Rs. 32,000/-. The imposition of penalty of Rs. 1000/- which was confirmed by the Commissioner is simply in violation of mandatory minimum penalty of Rs. 100/- per day under Section 76, as held in the case of ETA Engineering Ltd. v. CCE, Chennai reported in 2006 (3) S.T.R. 429 (Tri-LB) : 2004 (174) E.L.T. 19 (T.-LB).

4. I find the submissions of the learned DR convincing and therefore set aside the order of the original authority and Commissioner (Appeals) in so far as it relates to penalty imposed under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1944 (sic) (1994) with the direction that the Original authority should decide the penalty afresh after giving an opportunity of hearing to the respondents.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumb... Same Parties Commissioner of Customs vs Jyoti Structures Ltd. Same Subject Service Tax Same Judge V T M.